Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites

Nassoohi, Negin; Kazemi, Haleh; Sadaghiani, M; Mansouri, Mona; Rakhshan, Vahid

doi:10.4103/1735-3327.170575

Cited by 33 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was no significant difference in the failure mode of different groups. Adhesive failure is the fracture in the adhesive layer between two composite layers while the cohesive fracture is a fracture within each composite matrix (8,9,36). The higher incidence of mixed fracture in the present study showed that the bond strength of composite repair is average.…”

Section: Shapiro-wilk Test Was Used For Evaluating Data Distributionmentioning

confidence: 55%

“…The repair of composite restoration can reduce the cavity preparation size, preserving intact tooth structure, prevent pulpal damage, increase the longevity of the restoration and reduce costs (3)(4)(5)(6). A successful repair cannot occur between the two layers without any surface preparation (chemical or mechanical) (7)(8)(9). One of the bonds (C=C) during the first 24 hours, that enable this layer to polymerize with new composite monomers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of Surface Preparations Combined With Different Generations of Bonding on the Bond Strength of Resin Composite Repair: An Original Article

Valian¹,

Nejatifard²,

Salehi³

et al. 2020

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study evaluated the effect of different mechanical surface preparation methods, as well as different adhesives including universal bonding agents, on the shear bond strength of composite repairs. Methods: This study was experimentally performed on 64 Z250 composite discs (3M, ESPE) with 6 mm diameter and 2 mm height. A total of 60 samples were randomly divided into 6 groups as follows: Group A) diamond milling + Adper Single Bond 2, group B) diamond milling + Single Bond Universal, group C) diamond milling + All Bond Universal, group D) sandblast + Adper Single Bond 2, group E) sandblast + Single Bond Universal, group F) sandblast + All Bond Universal. Then, the new composite was placed on the bonding layer, cured, and underwent aging again. The samples were assessed for shear bond strength by universal testing machine and their failure mode was investigated under the light microscope (20x and 100x). Finally, 4 remaining samples, which were surface-prepared by diamond milling and sandblasting, were evaluated for qualitative analysis of surface roughness using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM). Data were analyzed by oneway ANOVA and Fisher's exact tests. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in shear bond strength and failure mode among the groups (P > 0.05). However, diamond milling + Single Bond Universal group showed the highest and Adper Single Bond 2 had the lowest bond strength. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in bond strength using different methods. Therefore, diamond milling + Single Bond Universal was suggested as the best and most available method compared to sandblasting.

show abstract

Section: Shapiro-wilk Test Was Used For Evaluating Data Distributionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Surface Preparations Combined With Different Generations of Bonding on the Bond Strength of Resin Composite Repair: An Original Article

Valian¹,

Nejatifard²,

Salehi³

et al. 2020

Avicenna J Dent Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,8,10 In order to avoid weak bond at the area of existing composite, alumina oxide sandblasting was done to the composite surface at the time of cementation. 29 Measurement of microleakage was done by measuring the incisal and cervical microleakage in Mm, then dividing them by the total bonded surface of the veneer and multiplying by 100% to yield the microleakage percentage. All the measurements were done digitally by computer software.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Ceramic and Substrate Types on the Microleakage of Aged Porcelain Laminate Veneers

Alnakib¹,

Alsaady²

2021

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the effects of the type of ceramic, and the influence of the type of cervical substrate on the microleakage of aged Porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs). Materials and Methods A total of 48 sound human maxillary premolars were divided randomly into two groups (n=24), Group A: lithium disilicate PLVs; Group B: zirconia reinforced lithium silicate PLVs. The groups were further subdivided into four subgroups (n=12): (A1, B1): finishing line placed in Class V composite filling; (A2, B2): finishing line placed in sound enamel. In subgroups A1 and B1 standardized Class V cavities were prepared and restored with nanocomposite. Standardized PLVs tooth preparation was done for the specimens in all subgroups. Cementation of PLVs was done with a light cured resin cement and specimens were stored in distilled water for 2 weeks. Mechanical load cycling (45,000 cycle, 49 N at 2.5 Hz) and thermocycling procedure (500 cycles, 5–55°C) were done. A microleakage test was done with dye penetration (2% methylene blue) and the microleakage percentage was recorded and calculated using a stereomicroscope and ImageJ program. Results Means of microleakage percentage of the subgroups were: A1 (6.6075%), A2 (4.6058%), B1 (7.3158%), and B2 (6.105%), Two-way ANOVA showed a significant effect of ceramic type and cervical composite substrate. According to samples t -test, subgroup A2 was significantly lower than A1 and B2, while subgroup B2 was significantly lower than B1. A P -value≤0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Conclusion The type of ceramic and the type of substrate both affects PLV microleakage. Lithium disilicate PLVs had significantly lower microleakage compared to zirconia reinforced lithium silicate PLVs. Teeth with cervical composite substrate had a significantly higher microleakage compared to teeth with enamel substrate.

show abstract

“…To solve this problem, it has been proposed to perform both a mechanical (sandblasting with aluminum oxide, bur abrasion, acid etching and laser irradiation) and a chemical one (application of bonding resin and silane) of the surface to be repaired. Although these techniques have been described, there is currently no consensus on the protocol to follow [58][59][60].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative In Vitro Study of the Bond Strength of Composite to Carbon Fiber Versus Ceramic to Cobalt–Chromium Alloys Frameworks for Fixed Dental Prostheses

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this comparative in vitro study was to assess the bond strength and mechanical failure of carbon-fiber-reinforced composites against cobalt–chrome structures with ceramic veneering. Materials and methods: A total of 24 specimens (12 per group) simulating dental prosthetic frameworks were fabricated. The experimental specimens were subjected to a thermocycling aging process and to evaluate bond strength. All specimens were subjected to a three-point bending test to fracture using a universal testing machine. Results: The cobalt–chrome/ceramic group yielded a bond strength value of 21.71 ± 2.16 MPa, while the carbon-fiber-reinforced composite group showed 14.50 ± 3.50 MPa. The failure assessment reported statistical significance between groups. Although carbon-fiber-reinforced composite group showed lower bond strength values, the chipping incidence in this group was as well lower. Conclusions: The chrome–cobalt/ceramic group showed greater bonding strength compared to the carbon-fiber-reinforced composite; most of the fractures within the cobalt–chrome/ceramic group, had no possibility of direct clinical repair.

show abstract

Effects of three surface conditioning techniques on repair bond strength of nanohybrid and nanofilled composites

Cited by 33 publications

References 18 publications

Evaluation of Surface Preparations Combined With Different Generations of Bonding on the Bond Strength of Resin Composite Repair: An Original Article

Evaluation of Surface Preparations Combined With Different Generations of Bonding on the Bond Strength of Resin Composite Repair: An Original Article

Influence of Ceramic and Substrate Types on the Microleakage of Aged Porcelain Laminate Veneers

Comparative In Vitro Study of the Bond Strength of Composite to Carbon Fiber Versus Ceramic to Cobalt–Chromium Alloys Frameworks for Fixed Dental Prostheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About